A8-5500 vs Core i3-7102E

A8-5500 vs Core i3-7102E Performance Spectrum

A8-5500

4 / 4

2,615

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-7102E

2 / 4

2,599

0.0%

Celeron J4025

Core 2 Duo T5750

Pentium Dual Core T3400

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A8-5500 vs Core i3-7102E FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A8-5500 vs Core i3-7102E: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A8-5500

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Core i3-7102E.

Trade-offs

❌160% higher power demand at 65W vs 25W.

Core i3-7102E

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 25W instead of 65W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A8-5500 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,599 vs 2,615).
❌Launch MSRP is still $225 MSRP, while A8-5500 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A8-5500.

Quick Answers

So, is A8-5500 better than Core i3-7102E?

Yes. A8-5500 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A8-5500 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.7% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A8-5500 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A8-5500 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A8-5500 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $225 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-7102E only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2017 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (11.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on that older DDR4-era platform.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-7102E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A8-5500 vs Core i3-7102E Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A8-5500

The A8-5500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,615 points. Launch price was $90.

Core i3-7102E

The Core i3-7102E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,599 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The A8-5500 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-7102E offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A8-5500 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the A8-5500 versus 2.1 GHz on the Core i3-7102E — a 55.2% clock advantage for the A8-5500. The A8-5500 uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-7102E uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A8-5500 scores 2,615 against the Core i3-7102E's 2,599 — a 0.6% lead for the A8-5500. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A8-5500 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-7102E.

Feature	A8-5500	Core i3-7102E
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+76%	2.1 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512 kB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	2,615	2,599
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	659
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,962
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,898

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches 1866 on the A8-5500 versus DDR4-2400 on the Core i3-7102E — the Core i3-7102E supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 64 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: FM2 (A8-5500) and Intel 100 Series,Intel 200 Series (Core i3-7102E).

Feature	A8-5500	Core i3-7102E
Socket	FM2	—
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1866	DDR4-2400+29%
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	64 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: true (A8-5500) vs Yes (Core i3-7102E). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 7560D (A8-5500) and Intel HD Graphics 630 (Core i3-7102E) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: A8-5500 rivals Pentium G2120.